Case Digest (G.R. No. 222916)
Facts:
Heirs of Spouses Gervacio A. Ramirez and Martina Carbonel, represented by Cesar S. Ramirez and Elmer R. Aduca, v. Joey Abon and the Register of Deeds of Nueva Vizcaya, G.R. No. 222916, July 24, 2019, Supreme Court Second Division, Caguioa, J., writing for the Court.Petitioners are the heirs of the late spouses Gervacio Ramirez and Martina Carbonel (the Heirs of the Sps. Ramirez); respondents are Joey T. Abon and the Register of Deeds of Nueva Vizcaya (RD). The dispute concerns Original Certificate of Title No. T-4480 (OCT) covering a 1,266-sq.m. lot (Lot 1748) in Bagabag, Nueva Vizcaya, which on its face remained registered in the names of the Spouses Ramirez.
In 1978 Angel Abon (respondent Abon’s father) purportedly obtained a new owner’s duplicate of the OCT based on a document titled “Confirmation of Previous Sale” (CPS), and a 135-sq.m. portion (Lot 1748-A) was later segregated and issued Transfer Certificate of Title No. T-50359. In June 2013 the petitioners received a copy of the CPS; fearing Abon would use it to transfer the remainder of Lot 1748, they filed a complaint for annulment of the CPS alleging forgery. The Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 27, however dismissed that complaint motu proprio for lack of jurisdiction. The petitioners sought certiorari relief before the Court of Appeals (CA), Fourth Division (CA-G.R. CV No. 131624), which denied relief and whose decision became final and executory on November 1, 2014.
Separately, on July 5, 2013 respondent Abon filed a petition for reconstitution (LRC No. 6847) in RTC Branch 28, alleging loss of the owner’s duplicate of the OCT and submitting an Affidavit of Loss (June 3, 2013). The RTC, Branch 28 granted the petition on October 4, 2013, ordering the RD to issue a new owner’s duplicate; that decision became final and executory (Certificate of Finality dated November 19, 2013). On December 3, 2013 the petitioners filed a Petition for Annulment of Judgment under Rule 47 (CA-G.R. SP No. 132961) before the CA, Former Fourteenth Division, challenging the RTC’s jurisdiction and alleging lack of notice to the registered owners or their successors.
The CA, Former 14th Division denied the petition for annulment in a decision dated July 29, 2015...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the Court of Appeals err in denying the petitioners’ Petition for Annulment of Judgment under Rule 47 on the ground that the RTC had jurisdiction over the petition for reconstitution?
- If the RTC lacked jurisdiction, whether the failure to notify the registered owners (now the petitioners’ predecessors-in-interest) rendered the RTC’s proceedings void under Section 109 of PD 1529...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)